Martin Luther King, Jr.

[bamacre]

"I Have a Dream"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk

"Beyond Vietnam..."
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence2.htm

IMO, MLK was twice the man Lincoln was. He was a man of peace, a great uniter of people, and was more successful in bringing justice and freedom via peace than Lincoln via war.

 

[Anarchist420]

I agree

 

[bfdd]

Big fan of the MLK jr

 

[LegendKiller]

"I Have a Dream"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbUtL_0vAJk

"Beyond Vietnam..."
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence2.htm

IMO, MLK was twice the man Lincoln was. He was a man of peace, a great uniter of people, and was more successful in bringing justice and freedom via peace than Lincoln via war.

Why the hell are you evening making the comparison? It's a moronic viewpoint but I'll also point out that -

Without Lincoln, MLK would likely have been born a slave in Atlanta and would probably not have gone to school and would have been raised in the confederacy.


Regardless, the Civil War was coming whether Lincoln had pushed it or not. It was inevitable. To make the comparison between the two is utterly ridiculous.

Yet another attempt by Libertopians to denigrate Lincoln.

 

[drebo]

And he wasn't gay, right?

Damn homophobe conservatives.

(just kidding )

 

[bamacre]

Why the hell are you evening making the comparison? It's a moronic viewpoint but I'll also point out that -

Where do you think MLK was standing when he gave his "I Have a Dream" speech?

Without Lincoln, MLK would likely have been born a slave in Atlanta and would probably not have gone to school and would have been raised in the confederacy.

That's probably true. To imply that slavery would still exist in his time is quite far fetched. But yes, you're correct if you are implying only that MLK had the advantage of living 100 years later, when people were more intelligent and experienced. Definitely.

Regardless, the Civil War was coming whether Lincoln had pushed it or not. It was inevitable. To make the comparison between the two is utterly ridiculous.

To say the civil war was inevitable is ridiculous.

Yet another attempt by Libertopians to denigrate Lincoln.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging the failures of the past. It is the only way we can prevent them from happening again. The only real winners of war are those able to prevent them.

 

[LegendKiller]

Where do you think MLK was standing when he gave his "I Have a Dream" speech?

That's probably true. To imply that slavery would still exist in his time is quite far fetched. But yes, you're correct if you are implying only that MLK had the advantage of living 100 years later, when people were more intelligent and experienced. Definitely.

To say the civil war was inevitable is ridiculous.

There is nothing wrong with acknowledging the failures of the past. It is the only way we can prevent them from happening again. The only real winners of war are those able to prevent them.

He was standing at the monument in recognition of the groundwork laid by Lincoln, acknowledging that without such an important effort, MLK would never have been able to achieve what he had. I don't believe MLK would have said he was a better person than Lincoln because he would have acknowledged that Lincoln had to face a completely different time and situation in history (one where Ghandi hadn't even lived yet).

The Civil War was inevitable, if it hadn't have happened during Lincoln's tenure it would have happened later. The south simply did not want to give up the economic power of slavery.

 

[Anarchist420]

He was standing at the monument in recognition of the groundwork laid by Lincoln, acknowledging that without such an important effort, MLK would never have been able to achieve what he had. I don't believe MLK would have said he was a better person than Lincoln because he would have acknowledged that Lincoln had to face a completely different time and situation in history (one where Ghandi hadn't even lived yet).

The Civil War was inevitable, if it hadn't have happened during Lincoln's tenure it would have happened later. The south simply did not want to give up the economic power of slavery.

Um no, the north did not want to give up mercantalism.

 

[Phokus]

Lets see if bamacre is still a fan of MLK:

You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism.

MLK's 'poor people campaign':

Jobs, income and housing were the main goals of the Poor People’s Campaign. The campaign would help the poor by dramatizing their needs, uniting all races under the commonality of hardship and presenting a plan to start to a solution[3]. Under the "economic bill of rights," the Poor People's Campaign asked for the federal government to prioritize helping the poor with a $30 billion anti-poverty package that included a commitment to full employment, a guaranteed annual income measure and more low-income housing[4]. The Poor People’s Campaign was part of the second phase of the civil rights movement. While the first phase had exposed the problems of segregation, King hoped to address the "limitations to our achievements" with a second, broader phase[2].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People's_Campaign

 

[drebo]

No one is infallable. Some of everyone's ideas are stupid.

To imply that capitalism is the cause of poor urban living conditions is laughable. That does not, however, take away other importance.

However, I think it is also laughable to imply that without MLK, we would still have slavery and segregation.

 

[bamacre]

To imply that capitalism is the cause of poor urban living conditions is laughable.

Exactly!

In fact it was the result of a lack of capitalism, the result of a collectivist society which held white people in a higher regard than blacks. It was the result of blacks not owning their own their own lives, their body, not owning the fruits of their labor. It was the result of tyranny.

 

[bamacre]

This thread went in a direction not intended. It was the means of MLK I wanted to praise. The civil disobedience. When they put handcuffs on King and hauled him off to jail, he didn't form some kind of militancy and incite violence nor hatred. He was no hypocrite. He didn't lose faith in society, instead he united it and progressed it.

 

[Craig234]

nm

 

[werepossum]

This thread went in a direction not intended. It was the means of MLK I wanted to praise. The civil disobedience. When they put handcuffs on King and hauled him off to jail, he didn't form some kind of militancy and incite violence nor hatred. He was no hypocrite. He didn't lose faith in society, instead he united it and progressed it.

Plus he made meaningful social changes whilst still getting tons of tail, bless his little socialist heart! +1 to MLK Jr.

 

[LegendKiller]

This thread went in a direction not intended. It was the means of MLK I wanted to praise. The civil disobedience. When they put handcuffs on King and hauled him off to jail, he didn't form some kind of militancy and incite violence nor hatred. He was no hypocrite. He didn't lose faith in society, instead he united it and progressed it.

Then don't direct it in a direction that you didn't "intend". Your initial post was at fault.

 

[tk149]

Then don't direct it in a direction that you didn't "intend". Your initial post was at fault.

I have to agree. I think both MLK, Jr and Lincoln were great men. Why make it a competition?

 

[Phokus]

Exactly!

In fact it was the result of a lack of capitalism, the result of a collectivist society which held white people in a higher regard than blacks. It was the result of blacks not owning their own their own lives, their body, not owning the fruits of their labor. It was the result of tyranny.

Yes, if only blacks had businesses that southern whites would have ignored (and probably would have vandalized), they would have brought themselves out of poverty. (Are you shitting me?)

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Michal King was a pretty good community organizer and good motivator.

One must however look beyond the story book veneer his "legacy" is wrapped in to see the real truth. He really wasn't a Dr. He wasn't a Rev. And he wasn't even a "Jr." Some will however only embrace the story book while ignoring the most important part of the story book. "content of character" - was brilliant - if only more people today would heed that part of his storybook legacy...

 

[Ackmed]

He was no hypocrite.

Really? So paying for prostitutes while putting on the show of being a Christian isnt being hypocritical? I will have to remember that. Or how about the fact that he plagiarized part of his doctoral dissertation. Guess thats is not hypocrisy either.

MLK did a lot a good, no question. But to claim he wasnt a hypocrite or was a better man than Lincoln is not so cut and dry as you try to make it. Worshiping a man who did the things he did, is not what I am about, sorry.

 

[werepossum]

Really? So paying for prostitutes while putting on the show of being a Christian isnt being hypocritical? I will have to remember that. Or how about the fact that he plagiarized part of his doctoral dissertation. Guess thats is not hypocrisy either.

MLK did a lot a good, no question. But to claim he wasnt a hypocrite or was a better man than Lincoln is not so cut and dry as you try to make it. Worshiping a man who did the things he did, is not what I am about, sorry.

Jim Steinman said it best: "Every hero was once - every villain was once - just a boy with a bad attitude." Really nice people don't often change the world. People who do change the world tend to have flaws commensurate with their gifts. As to who was better, Lincoln or MLK, I'll leave that to G-d. That way I can't be wrong.

 

[First]

To say the civil war was inevitable is ridiculous.

See, this is what happens when you're entirely self-educated. Try reading Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era for a little perspective on the inevitability of war, and why slavery would have existed today had it not been for Lincoln and Northern "aggression". Really boils down to the South not having any way of supporting themselves without slavery, economically and inextricably racially dependent on enslaving black Americans, something that continued for decades afterward in the form of sharecropping and only by WWII did a black middle class exist in any substantial numbers. Something pretty much zero American history scholars would agree would have been possible without the Civil War.

 

[LegendKiller]

See, this is what happens when you're entirely self-educated. Try reading Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era for a little perspective on the inevitability of war, and why slavery would have existed today had it not been for Lincoln and Northern "aggression". Really boils down to the South not having any way of supporting themselves without slavery, economically and inextricably racially dependent on enslaving black Americans, something that continued for decades afterward in the form of sharecropping and only by WWII did a black middle class exist in any substantial numbers. Something pretty much zero American history scholars would agree would have been possible without the Civil War.

Books? Historical fact? Reality?

Nah. YouTube and Mises.org then, now, forever.

You see, the logical fact behind slavery is what you said here, without such free labor, the south would have been far less profitable, wealthy, and relevant. They knew it and wanted to keep an entire race subjugated in perpetuity. This is why they fought so hard for the 3/5ths compromise, they knew that if the Constitution were kept to only "Free" people, they would have been underrepresented and would have been forced to eventually de-slave, at the same time, they didn't want to pay the full might of taxes on that population.

As a result, the south was able to continue slavery for another 90 years and would have been able to continue it far longer had it not been for the north finally pressing the issue.

But hey, it was the north that wanted to keep it's mercantilism, not the south that wanted to keep slaves. This is what you get out of 3rd tier schooling and misguided educations perpetuated by libertopians who would like nothing more than return us to an agrarian wonderland of perfection.

That's the regressive agenda for you.

 

[First]

What I don't get is why anyone thinks they can possible understand a subject matter without talking to subjectm matter experts that have studied the topic their entire lives before jumping to oddly constructed alternative theories of history that are never provable and almost always rooted in the notion that people don't behave in ways they've proven they've behaved for pretty much all of human existence. Particularly in 1860's America, where many black slaves didn't at all mind being slaves to begin with, something often used as justification by their white plantation owners. This free will to choose slavery or not, the act of free will itself being very American and principally just, certainly in no way excuses the immorality of slavery beyond any shadow of a doubt. Nor the reality that slavery couldn't have reasonably been eradicated in any form or fashion in the South without a war, as the alternative session would have of course extended slavery out an untold amount of decades and no doubt had all sorts of unintended negative consequences no reasonable person could have predicted.

But I'm sure bamacre didn't intend to deflect MLK day with unfounded fringe alternative theories on actual American history by pushing a discussion of MLK's twice greatness over Lincoln's and the necessity of the Civil War.

 

[Zorkorist]

One of the single men to have a holiday named after them.

'nuff said.

-John

 

[LTC8K6]

MLK wouldn't have done this...

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/01/boxing-george.html